Pay attention, consigliori. The fact is that just enough "Californians" were pressured into their decision — for fear of hellfire and brimstone — by a church in another state! Indeed, WTF is it to them?!

Example: I once worked at a large ad agency (both in Boston and NYC) wherein some 15% of employees and management were gay or lesbian. The three principles wrere not gay. But when it came time to review their health insurance carrier (mid '90s), they sought and chose a company that offered plans for "spousal equivalents". They also enforced a policy preventing married couples from working there by putting the same restrictions on gay couples. In other words, they had no problem putting gay and hetero couples in the same bucket. Guess what, the agency still thrives today. Didn't collapse into debauchery. Oh, and not to ruin your day, but they have a sizable office in London. Care to apply?

But like I said, on Keymaker Lane, I'm driving the wrong way up a one-way street. I pity your myopia.

Dead off more like... WTF is it to him that Californians want heterosexual-only marriage?km

Change your quote to a similar civil rights equality issue:

WTF is it to him that Californians want mixed race, negro caucasian marriage?(I'm trying to use what the legal words would be if one were talking about a state law in the 60s.)

It would be a big deal to him and to all of us as humans with humanity. It would be a big deal that inequality is erased from the law books. As stated by him, even though he is heterosexual, it is a big deal.

WTF, why is it a big deal? That is like saying why is it a big deal for me that we treat prisoners in Guantanamo fairly and respectfully? I am never going to be a terrorist.

WTF, why is it a big deal? That is like saying why is it a big deal for me that we do not put to death a murderer who is 14 and retarded? I am never going to be 14 and retarded again.

It is called empathy for people who are not like you. Equality and civility for all which is a hallmark of all great civilizations.

So during the American Civil Rights Movement, it wouldn't have mattered whether whites joined their black friends? It wouldn't have mattered that Lyndon Johnson agreed with MLK that we shall overcome? It wouldn't have mattered that white freedom riders sat with their black peers and got killed alongside them?

Change your quote to a similar civil rights equality issue: WTF is it to him that Californians want mixed race, negro caucasian marriage?

Exactly, but you're arguing my point for me that the 'WTF is it to..." line of logic doesn't help to distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate causes - oh alright then... object and animal unions should now be within the definition of marriage... WTF is it to anyone who disagrees.

The Mob is but a vestige of what it once was (again, you're making up your own virtual world in which to try The Cases In Your Head). None-the-less, what the mob does is not only criminal, it actually hurts people. Kills people. Ruins peoples lives. So you're saying that gay marriage hurts, kills, ruins lives? That it's criminal?

Let's try a less violent metaphor: You stop at a cafe and order a cup of black coffee. You order it black because you hate cream. Maybe you're lactose intolerant (ok, so I'm half right). The person next to you is enjoying cream in her coffee. By your logic, this has just ruined your day. She has had the audacity and the moral bankruptcy to do to her coffee what you would never do to yours! By adding cream to her coffee in your presence has contaminated your coffee. Rendered it non-potable.

Wow. If you're not embarrassed by your position, your "volume cannot be repaired."

By using animal unions as an example you not only expose the flaw in your logic you expose your own prejudiced view. How can someone make the jump from gays to animal unions needing legal protection? Only if one looks at both of those unions in the same light. Which, as I think you expect by your comparison, engenders a distasteful reaction from most.

Civil rights are an entity that changes as civilization becomes more civil. My WTFs just pointed out what was recently illegal and is now legal. It is way overdue for gay marriage to cross that line. Years from now you might make a case for you marrying the cute lamb Daisy. That is your prerogative. I have nothing to fear that you have the right to bring the issue to a judge's attention. I just don't think it has legs, even if you count Daisy's served with mint jelly. And there is just no way you are getting her on my health plan. An artificial leg would have to fall under "a preexisting condition based on future need".

Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.

All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.